POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Friday 1/31, we first had the pleasure of having Senator Anne Haskell address the class on the topic of the Legislative/Court(constitution) interaction. After that, we returned to Glucksberg, going through both the question of how the asserted right is described ("carefully") and then whether that right is "fundamental". We will pick up again on Monday 2/3 in Glucksberg with the question of whether precedent supplies a different answer to the question of whether the asserted right is fundamental, and the assignment for Monday is simply to refine your Glucksberg case brief, as well as to be able to describe what Justice Souter's view is of how the case should be decided.
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Friday 1/31, we discussed the Abrams case. We started with the historical background of the case. We went over how questions of "substantial evidence" differ from questions of "law". We went over the history of these crucial months of 1919 between Schenck and Abrams, for Justice Holmes, and the ways in which the Holmes dissent in Abrams was and was not consistent with the opinion in Schenck. The assignment for Monday 2/3 is to read through p. 211 of the text.
POS 359 THE CURRENT SUPREME COURT TERM
In class today, Friday 1/31, we finished going over McCullen's brief, and began our discussion of the State's brief. We discussed Coakley's brief in terms of Stevens' Hill opinion. We will go through the Mass. rebuttal of McCullen's positions point by point on Monday (viewpoint neutrality, subject-matter neutrality, narrow tailoring, alternatives). The additional assignment for Monday 2/3 is to listen to and read the oral argument in this case. You can access both at the supremecourt.gov site, but you can have them simultaneously at the oyez.org site. Also, I told the class that I plan to distribute the first written assignment on Monday 2/3, to be due 2/10.
Friday, January 31, 2014
Wednesday, January 29, 2014
January 29, 2014
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Wednesday 1/29, I first went over the U.S. Supreme Court case,, Brown v. EMA, that followed the textbook decision. We went over all four of the opinions in that Supreme Court case. We also looked at how the majority decision used the narrow tailoring portion of the hurdle to find the California law both underinclusive and overinclusive. We then began our journey through the Glucksberg opinion and case brief, getting to Washington's contention on appeal. We briefly discussed three types of institutional conflicts in our system: individual rights v. government, federal power v. state power, and separation of executive, legislative, and judicial powers. On Friday, we will be joined in the beginning of class by Senator Anne Haskell, assistant majority leader of the Maine Senate. We will then continue with our briefing of Glucksberg. The assignment for Friday 1/31 is continue working on your Glucksberg case brief.
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Wednesday 1/29 Jim Tierney talked to the class about both Pete Seeger's stand before HUAC, and the present Supreme Court case of restrictions on ant-abortion protests, as examples of civil liberties questions. The assignment for Friday 1/31 is read the Abrams case in the text.
POS 359 THE CURRENT SUPREME COURT TERM
In class today, Wednesday 1/29 we worked through the mechanics of the Massachusetts law, and then looked at the ways in which McCullen argued that this law was distinguishable from the Colorado law in Hill. We talked about the argument that the Mass. law was content-based, both in viewpoint and in subject-matter. We will continue with other ways of distinguishing Hill on Friday. The additional assignment for Friday 1/31 is to read the Respondent's brief in McCullen, at least through the Summary of the Argument.
In class today, Wednesday 1/29, I first went over the U.S. Supreme Court case,, Brown v. EMA, that followed the textbook decision. We went over all four of the opinions in that Supreme Court case. We also looked at how the majority decision used the narrow tailoring portion of the hurdle to find the California law both underinclusive and overinclusive. We then began our journey through the Glucksberg opinion and case brief, getting to Washington's contention on appeal. We briefly discussed three types of institutional conflicts in our system: individual rights v. government, federal power v. state power, and separation of executive, legislative, and judicial powers. On Friday, we will be joined in the beginning of class by Senator Anne Haskell, assistant majority leader of the Maine Senate. We will then continue with our briefing of Glucksberg. The assignment for Friday 1/31 is continue working on your Glucksberg case brief.
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Wednesday 1/29 Jim Tierney talked to the class about both Pete Seeger's stand before HUAC, and the present Supreme Court case of restrictions on ant-abortion protests, as examples of civil liberties questions. The assignment for Friday 1/31 is read the Abrams case in the text.
POS 359 THE CURRENT SUPREME COURT TERM
In class today, Wednesday 1/29 we worked through the mechanics of the Massachusetts law, and then looked at the ways in which McCullen argued that this law was distinguishable from the Colorado law in Hill. We talked about the argument that the Mass. law was content-based, both in viewpoint and in subject-matter. We will continue with other ways of distinguishing Hill on Friday. The additional assignment for Friday 1/31 is to read the Respondent's brief in McCullen, at least through the Summary of the Argument.
Monday, January 27, 2014
January 27, 2014
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Monday 1/17, I distributed one handout, my version of the VSDA case brief. We finished going through that brief, covering both the format that I'm looking for, and the substance of what the court held. The assignment for Wednesday 1/19 is to read through p. 32 of the text, and to brief the Glucksberg case for yourself (not graded or handed in).
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Monday 1/17, I distributed one handout, the Sedition Act of 1918. We compared the 1798 and the 1918 Sedition Acts. We saw how in Schenck Justice Holmes first dealt with the question of prior restrsint. We then examined two questions posed by Holmes about the scope of the Free Speech protection: a)what type of circumstances justify a government restriction on free speech and b)if some government restriction is allowed, how broadly may the restriction sweep in terms of actually having to solve the perceived problem? On Wednesday 1/29, Jim Tierney (former Attorney General of Maine) will address the class. He is a great speaker, and this class meeting should be a highlight of the semester. The assignment then for Friday 1/31 is to read in the text through p.205 (Abrams). I asked the class specifically to think about whether and how Holmes' opinion in Schenck is consistent with his dissent in Abrams.
POS 359 THE CURRENT SUPREME COURT TERM
In class today, Monday 1/17, we first went over the 1st Amendment flow chart: content-based restrictions, strict scrutiny, narrow tailoring, alternatives. We then used that flow chart to see how both Stevens and Scalia analyzed the Colorado statute. We went through the operation of the statute, both what's allowed and what's forbidden. The assignment for Wednesday 1/19 is read the Petitioner's Brief in McCullen, previously assigned. Read the brief with the opinions in Hill in mind.
In class today, Monday 1/17, I distributed one handout, my version of the VSDA case brief. We finished going through that brief, covering both the format that I'm looking for, and the substance of what the court held. The assignment for Wednesday 1/19 is to read through p. 32 of the text, and to brief the Glucksberg case for yourself (not graded or handed in).
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Monday 1/17, I distributed one handout, the Sedition Act of 1918. We compared the 1798 and the 1918 Sedition Acts. We saw how in Schenck Justice Holmes first dealt with the question of prior restrsint. We then examined two questions posed by Holmes about the scope of the Free Speech protection: a)what type of circumstances justify a government restriction on free speech and b)if some government restriction is allowed, how broadly may the restriction sweep in terms of actually having to solve the perceived problem? On Wednesday 1/29, Jim Tierney (former Attorney General of Maine) will address the class. He is a great speaker, and this class meeting should be a highlight of the semester. The assignment then for Friday 1/31 is to read in the text through p.205 (Abrams). I asked the class specifically to think about whether and how Holmes' opinion in Schenck is consistent with his dissent in Abrams.
POS 359 THE CURRENT SUPREME COURT TERM
In class today, Monday 1/17, we first went over the 1st Amendment flow chart: content-based restrictions, strict scrutiny, narrow tailoring, alternatives. We then used that flow chart to see how both Stevens and Scalia analyzed the Colorado statute. We went through the operation of the statute, both what's allowed and what's forbidden. The assignment for Wednesday 1/19 is read the Petitioner's Brief in McCullen, previously assigned. Read the brief with the opinions in Hill in mind.
Friday, January 24, 2014
January 24, 2014
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Friday 1/24, we began our briefing of the VSDA case. We went through citation form in all the levels of the federal court system. We covered the parties, objective, cause of action, trial court defense, and prior and present proceedings. We discussed summary judgment and de novo review. We talked about the three levels of scrutiny for free speech cases: strict scrutiny, intermediate scrutiny, and rational basis review. We will pick up with the contentions and the rest of the case brief on Monday. The assignment for Monday 1/27 is to continue to work on and refine your VSDA case brief.
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Friday 1/24, I distributed two handouts: an excerpt from the Maine Constitution, and the Sedition Act of 1789. We first finished our discussion of the NSA metadata collection, seeing how the Klayman Court distinguished Smith, rather than following it. We also talked about how the holding in Kayman may no longer be good law, in that the Court relied in part on the the fact that the NSA queried the data without prior judicial approval, a fact now changed by Obama's plan to require FISC approval prior to querying. We then began our discussion of free speech by looking at the language of the First Amendment, and comparing it to the language of the the free speech guarantee of the Maine Constitution. We also discussed the concept of prior restraint. The assignment for Friday 1/27 is to read in the text from p. 197-202, and to read the two handouts.
POS 359 THE CURRENT SUPREME COURT TERM
In class today, Friday 1/27, we first were treated to Justice Kevin Cuddy of the Maine Superior Court describe to us his experience argung a case to the U.S. Supreme Court. We the began our discussion of the Hill v. Colorado, going over the concept of facial versus as-applied challenges. We will continue with Hill on Monday.
The additional assignment for Monday 1/27 is to read the Petitioner’s Brief in the case of McCullen v. Coakley.
Start at the Supreme Court site: www.supremecourt.gov
Select from the menu on the left “Merits Briefs”.
Select “On-Line Merits Briefs” (this redirects you to the American Bar Association (ABA) site).
From the alphabetical list of cases. select “McCullen v. Coakley, 12-1168”.
Under “Merits Briefs” select “Brief for Petitioner”.
While you’re on the page listing all the briefs, browse the list of Amicus Briefs, to get a sense of the politics of the case.
In class today, Friday 1/24, we began our briefing of the VSDA case. We went through citation form in all the levels of the federal court system. We covered the parties, objective, cause of action, trial court defense, and prior and present proceedings. We discussed summary judgment and de novo review. We talked about the three levels of scrutiny for free speech cases: strict scrutiny, intermediate scrutiny, and rational basis review. We will pick up with the contentions and the rest of the case brief on Monday. The assignment for Monday 1/27 is to continue to work on and refine your VSDA case brief.
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Friday 1/24, I distributed two handouts: an excerpt from the Maine Constitution, and the Sedition Act of 1789. We first finished our discussion of the NSA metadata collection, seeing how the Klayman Court distinguished Smith, rather than following it. We also talked about how the holding in Kayman may no longer be good law, in that the Court relied in part on the the fact that the NSA queried the data without prior judicial approval, a fact now changed by Obama's plan to require FISC approval prior to querying. We then began our discussion of free speech by looking at the language of the First Amendment, and comparing it to the language of the the free speech guarantee of the Maine Constitution. We also discussed the concept of prior restraint. The assignment for Friday 1/27 is to read in the text from p. 197-202, and to read the two handouts.
POS 359 THE CURRENT SUPREME COURT TERM
In class today, Friday 1/27, we first were treated to Justice Kevin Cuddy of the Maine Superior Court describe to us his experience argung a case to the U.S. Supreme Court. We the began our discussion of the Hill v. Colorado, going over the concept of facial versus as-applied challenges. We will continue with Hill on Monday.
The additional assignment for Monday 1/27 is to read the Petitioner’s Brief in the case of McCullen v. Coakley.
Start at the Supreme Court site: www.supremecourt.gov
Select from the menu on the left “Merits Briefs”.
Select “On-Line Merits Briefs” (this redirects you to the American Bar Association (ABA) site).
From the alphabetical list of cases. select “McCullen v. Coakley, 12-1168”.
Under “Merits Briefs” select “Brief for Petitioner”.
While you’re on the page listing all the briefs, browse the list of Amicus Briefs, to get a sense of the politics of the case.
Wednesday, January 22, 2014
January 22, 2014
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Wednesday 1/22, we first went over from the Mills case the concept of dictum, and also the concept of detrimental reliance. We talked about MLK's Letter from the Birmingham Jail and the concept of what degrades human personality. We went over some vocabulary in the text. We discussed from the introductory materials in the chapter the concept of equitable versus legal remedies, and how an echo of the days of separate court systems is found in the the powers of the Maine Superior Court, as opposed to the Maine District Court. We went over the organization of both the federal and the state court systems. Finally we dipped our toes into VSDA case, discussing the power of the Supreme Court to define the terms of the Constitution. We looked at how the Supreme Court had created some zones of speech that are not protected by the First Amendment (obscenity, fighting words). We will launch into a case brief for VSDA on Friday. The assignment for Friday 1/24 is review the previously assigned VSDA case, creating for yourselves (not handed in or graded) your version of the VSDA case brief.
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Wednesday 1/22, we first decided that the next area of study after NSA metadata would be Free Speech. We discussed the changes that Obama announced last Friday in the methods of the NSA metadata collection and analysis. We then finished up our discussion of Jones by going over the three opinions, and how there were five votes for the concept that the technology of GPS was different enough from the beeper in Knotts that here there was a violation of the reasonable expectation of privacy (and therefore a "search"). We looked at ACLU v. Clapper, and saw how the U.S. District Court judge followed Smith. We also looked at the organization of the federal court system. We will pick up on Friday with the Klayman opinion, previously distributed. The assignment for Friday 1/24 is to review Klayman, trying to pick out each strand of the Judge's opinion that there was a "search" here.
POS 359 THE CURRENT SUPREME COURT TERM
In class today, Wednesday 1/22, we finished up our discussion of NLRB v. Noel Canning. We reviewed Verrilli's arguments, and contrasted them with Francisco's points. We also looked at Estrada's proposed flow chart for how arguments between the branches get worked out. The assignment for Friday 1/24 is to review the abridged Hill v. Colorado, previously assigned.
In class today, Wednesday 1/22, we first went over from the Mills case the concept of dictum, and also the concept of detrimental reliance. We talked about MLK's Letter from the Birmingham Jail and the concept of what degrades human personality. We went over some vocabulary in the text. We discussed from the introductory materials in the chapter the concept of equitable versus legal remedies, and how an echo of the days of separate court systems is found in the the powers of the Maine Superior Court, as opposed to the Maine District Court. We went over the organization of both the federal and the state court systems. Finally we dipped our toes into VSDA case, discussing the power of the Supreme Court to define the terms of the Constitution. We looked at how the Supreme Court had created some zones of speech that are not protected by the First Amendment (obscenity, fighting words). We will launch into a case brief for VSDA on Friday. The assignment for Friday 1/24 is review the previously assigned VSDA case, creating for yourselves (not handed in or graded) your version of the VSDA case brief.
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Wednesday 1/22, we first decided that the next area of study after NSA metadata would be Free Speech. We discussed the changes that Obama announced last Friday in the methods of the NSA metadata collection and analysis. We then finished up our discussion of Jones by going over the three opinions, and how there were five votes for the concept that the technology of GPS was different enough from the beeper in Knotts that here there was a violation of the reasonable expectation of privacy (and therefore a "search"). We looked at ACLU v. Clapper, and saw how the U.S. District Court judge followed Smith. We also looked at the organization of the federal court system. We will pick up on Friday with the Klayman opinion, previously distributed. The assignment for Friday 1/24 is to review Klayman, trying to pick out each strand of the Judge's opinion that there was a "search" here.
POS 359 THE CURRENT SUPREME COURT TERM
In class today, Wednesday 1/22, we finished up our discussion of NLRB v. Noel Canning. We reviewed Verrilli's arguments, and contrasted them with Francisco's points. We also looked at Estrada's proposed flow chart for how arguments between the branches get worked out. The assignment for Friday 1/24 is to review the abridged Hill v. Colorado, previously assigned.
Friday, January 17, 2014
January 17, 2014
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Friday 1/17, I distributed one handout, my version of the Mills case brief. We worked our way through the case brief. Along the way, we also went over the concept of following, distinguishing, or overruling prior cases. There is no class on Monday 1/20, in observance of Martin Luther King Jr. Day. The assignment for Wednesday 1/22 starts with reading MLK's Letter from the Birmingham jail on p. 59. Then read through p.21. Write out your own brief (not handed in or graded)of the VSDA case, following the template.
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Friday 1/17, we finished going over the majority and the two dissenting opinions in Smith. Along the way, we also went over the concept of following, distinguishing, or overruling prior cases. I talked about another case, Jones v. U.S. that dealt with a similar situation of precedent (Knotts) seeming to dictate that there was no reasonable expectation of privacy. We will pick up on Wednesday with how the concurrence in Jones distinguished Knotts. There is no class on Monday 1/20, in observance of Martin Luther King Jr. Day. The assignment for Wednesday 1/22 is to read in the news what President Obama says today about the NSA's metadata collection, and to read the two case distributed on Wednesday, Klayman and ACLU.
POS 359 THE CURRENT SUPREME COURT TERM
In class today, Friday 1/17, I distributed one handout, an abridgement of Hill v. Colorado. We continued our journey through the Noel Canning oral argument, looking at some of the grammatical, definitional, and political viewpoints of the Justices and the lawyers. We will pick up on Wednesday with Francisco's argument, and that of Estrada. There is no class on Monday 1/20, in observance of Martin Luther King Jr. Day. The assignment for Wednesday 1/22 is to finish the Noel Canning oral argument, and to read the Hill v. Colorado handout.
In class today, Friday 1/17, I distributed one handout, my version of the Mills case brief. We worked our way through the case brief. Along the way, we also went over the concept of following, distinguishing, or overruling prior cases. There is no class on Monday 1/20, in observance of Martin Luther King Jr. Day. The assignment for Wednesday 1/22 starts with reading MLK's Letter from the Birmingham jail on p. 59. Then read through p.21. Write out your own brief (not handed in or graded)of the VSDA case, following the template.
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Friday 1/17, we finished going over the majority and the two dissenting opinions in Smith. Along the way, we also went over the concept of following, distinguishing, or overruling prior cases. I talked about another case, Jones v. U.S. that dealt with a similar situation of precedent (Knotts) seeming to dictate that there was no reasonable expectation of privacy. We will pick up on Wednesday with how the concurrence in Jones distinguished Knotts. There is no class on Monday 1/20, in observance of Martin Luther King Jr. Day. The assignment for Wednesday 1/22 is to read in the news what President Obama says today about the NSA's metadata collection, and to read the two case distributed on Wednesday, Klayman and ACLU.
POS 359 THE CURRENT SUPREME COURT TERM
In class today, Friday 1/17, I distributed one handout, an abridgement of Hill v. Colorado. We continued our journey through the Noel Canning oral argument, looking at some of the grammatical, definitional, and political viewpoints of the Justices and the lawyers. We will pick up on Wednesday with Francisco's argument, and that of Estrada. There is no class on Monday 1/20, in observance of Martin Luther King Jr. Day. The assignment for Wednesday 1/22 is to finish the Noel Canning oral argument, and to read the Hill v. Colorado handout.
Wednesday, January 15, 2014
January 15, 2014
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Wednesday 1/15, I distributed two handouts: a Case Brief Template, and a blank case brief. We began putting Mills v. Wyman into the case brief format. We discussed citation form, the parties, the plaintiff's objective, the plaintiff's cause of action, and the defendant's trial court defense. We talked about the limited set of things that the plaintiff might want (objective) and the limited set of things that entitle the plaintiff to get what he wants (the cause of action) We talked about the relationship of breach of contract to the common law rules regarding contract formation, and the past and present proceedings. We got to the first of the appellant Mills' contention on appeal, that there was good consideration for this contract, arguing that the satisfaction of a moral obligation provides the needed consideration. That's the point at which we'll pick up on Friday. The assignment for Friday 1/17 is to finish working on the Mills case brief, trying to finish it based on the Case Brief Template (not handed in or graded). In addition, read through p. 14 of the textbook.
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Wednesday 1/15, I distributed three handouts: an article about Obama's plans regarding future phone metadata collection, and two U.S. District Court cases regarding the NSA'a current phone metadata collection, Klayman v. Obama and ACLU v. Clapper. We started our discussion of Smith v. Maryland. We briefly went over the strange history of the 14th Amendment (that eventually turned most of the Bill of Rights into protections against the state, as well as federal, government). We went over the interpretation of what constitutes a "search", both before and after Katz. We got as far in Smith as the review of Smith's contentions that he had an actual (subjective) expectation of privacy. We will pick up on Friday with the discussion of whether any actual expectation of privacy would have been reasonable. Along the way, we discussed citations for the Supreme Court, the difference between the judgment of the Court and the opinion of the Court, and the difference between the holding of the Court versus dictum in the Court's decision. The assignment for Friday 1/17 is to review the reminder of Smith, read the article about Obama's policy, and, as time permits, read both Klayman and and ACLU.
POS 359 THE CURRENT SUPREME COURT TERM
In class today, Wednesday 1/15, I distributed one handout, the list of the three Questions Presented in the Noel Canning case. We began by going over some of the mechanics of the Supreme Court: the qualifications for a Justice, the granting of cert., and assignment of decision-writing. We started our journey through the Noel Canning oral argument, examining the opening salvo of argument (by Verrilli), attack by Roberts, and rescue by Ginsburg. We will pick up with Scalia's new line of attack at 6:2; conflict between practice and text. The assignment for Friday 1/17 is to review Verrilli's argument, and to read, as time permits, the remainder of the oral argument.
In class today, Wednesday 1/15, I distributed two handouts: a Case Brief Template, and a blank case brief. We began putting Mills v. Wyman into the case brief format. We discussed citation form, the parties, the plaintiff's objective, the plaintiff's cause of action, and the defendant's trial court defense. We talked about the limited set of things that the plaintiff might want (objective) and the limited set of things that entitle the plaintiff to get what he wants (the cause of action) We talked about the relationship of breach of contract to the common law rules regarding contract formation, and the past and present proceedings. We got to the first of the appellant Mills' contention on appeal, that there was good consideration for this contract, arguing that the satisfaction of a moral obligation provides the needed consideration. That's the point at which we'll pick up on Friday. The assignment for Friday 1/17 is to finish working on the Mills case brief, trying to finish it based on the Case Brief Template (not handed in or graded). In addition, read through p. 14 of the textbook.
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Wednesday 1/15, I distributed three handouts: an article about Obama's plans regarding future phone metadata collection, and two U.S. District Court cases regarding the NSA'a current phone metadata collection, Klayman v. Obama and ACLU v. Clapper. We started our discussion of Smith v. Maryland. We briefly went over the strange history of the 14th Amendment (that eventually turned most of the Bill of Rights into protections against the state, as well as federal, government). We went over the interpretation of what constitutes a "search", both before and after Katz. We got as far in Smith as the review of Smith's contentions that he had an actual (subjective) expectation of privacy. We will pick up on Friday with the discussion of whether any actual expectation of privacy would have been reasonable. Along the way, we discussed citations for the Supreme Court, the difference between the judgment of the Court and the opinion of the Court, and the difference between the holding of the Court versus dictum in the Court's decision. The assignment for Friday 1/17 is to review the reminder of Smith, read the article about Obama's policy, and, as time permits, read both Klayman and and ACLU.
POS 359 THE CURRENT SUPREME COURT TERM
In class today, Wednesday 1/15, I distributed one handout, the list of the three Questions Presented in the Noel Canning case. We began by going over some of the mechanics of the Supreme Court: the qualifications for a Justice, the granting of cert., and assignment of decision-writing. We started our journey through the Noel Canning oral argument, examining the opening salvo of argument (by Verrilli), attack by Roberts, and rescue by Ginsburg. We will pick up with Scalia's new line of attack at 6:2; conflict between practice and text. The assignment for Friday 1/17 is to review Verrilli's argument, and to read, as time permits, the remainder of the oral argument.
Monday, January 13, 2014
January 13, 2014
POS 282 INTRODUCTION TO AMERICAN LAW
In class today, Monday 1/13, I distributed two handouts: the syllabus, and the 1825 case of Mills v. Wyman. We went over the syllabus. We then talked about parties in the Mills v. Wyman case (the plaintiff and the defendant; the appellant and the appellee); the differing rules in the Maine Supreme Court and the U.S. Supreme Court regarding the rule for how the order of the parties on appeal is listed; and the concept of whether the a dad should be obligated to fulfill his promise to pay the costs of the caretaker of his son. The assignment for Wednesday 1/15 is to read and prepare to discuss the case of Mills v. Wyman.
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Monday 1/13, I distributed two handouts: the syllabus, and the 1979 case of Smith v. Maryland. We went over the syllabus. We then talked about the question of what we perceive to be our rights regarding government keeping track of who we call and who calls us. We discussed the factual background of Smith a little, and the concept of what is a search. The assignment for Wednesday 1/15 is to read and prepare to discuss Smith v. Maryland.
POS 359 THE CURRENT SUPREME COURT TERM
In class today, Monday 1/13, I distributed three handouts: the syllabus, the homework for Wednesday, and a sheet of Supreme Court Justice biographies. We went over the syllabus. We the discussed the background of the Noel Canning case, looking at the constitutional text, the political battlefield, and the lack of prior case law on this issue. The assignment for Wednesday 1/15 is to read (at least the first part of) the transcript of the oral argument in NLRB v. Noel Canning.
In class today, Monday 1/13, I distributed two handouts: the syllabus, and the 1825 case of Mills v. Wyman. We went over the syllabus. We then talked about parties in the Mills v. Wyman case (the plaintiff and the defendant; the appellant and the appellee); the differing rules in the Maine Supreme Court and the U.S. Supreme Court regarding the rule for how the order of the parties on appeal is listed; and the concept of whether the a dad should be obligated to fulfill his promise to pay the costs of the caretaker of his son. The assignment for Wednesday 1/15 is to read and prepare to discuss the case of Mills v. Wyman.
POS 384 CIVIL LIBERTIES
In class today, Monday 1/13, I distributed two handouts: the syllabus, and the 1979 case of Smith v. Maryland. We went over the syllabus. We then talked about the question of what we perceive to be our rights regarding government keeping track of who we call and who calls us. We discussed the factual background of Smith a little, and the concept of what is a search. The assignment for Wednesday 1/15 is to read and prepare to discuss Smith v. Maryland.
POS 359 THE CURRENT SUPREME COURT TERM
In class today, Monday 1/13, I distributed three handouts: the syllabus, the homework for Wednesday, and a sheet of Supreme Court Justice biographies. We went over the syllabus. We the discussed the background of the Noel Canning case, looking at the constitutional text, the political battlefield, and the lack of prior case law on this issue. The assignment for Wednesday 1/15 is to read (at least the first part of) the transcript of the oral argument in NLRB v. Noel Canning.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)